Discuss the AI here!
- Thread starter Agony_Aunt
- Start date
- Status
someone from qa has been asking about in some threads in bugs including a thread entitled shields are made of wood but not yet in the npcs ignore weapon fire rate thread. i think we should give them time today and tomorrow at least to get caught up and then wait for an initial response.
Seems like Moderator did not like my post (Message #4138 Removed without any notification) There was full amount of sarcasm included too 
Oh well. That was my frustration with 3 times/row rebuy screen in 10 seconds Elite FAS with Plasma Accelerator set to autofire. Note to-self. Do not carry any cargo and forget modifications that needs some mined materials.
This is now Elite Dangerous with big D
Oh well. That was my frustration with 3 times/row rebuy screen in 10 seconds Elite FAS with Plasma Accelerator set to autofire. Note to-self. Do not carry any cargo and forget modifications that needs some mined materials.
This is now Elite Dangerous with big D
This was one of the things that turned me off to trading in 2.0 and before - it was too easy. I'd like handing over cargo to be more necessary than it is - if the pirates are difficult, I think they should be in a system where that would be expected (anarchy, feudal, etc), and they should accept a good amount of cargo (maybe, roughly 75% of their cargo hold's maximum? I dunno
), but they should be just as deadly as any other archetype.If you're talking about systems like Eravate, large and secure, I agree.
Wow... what a lot to read!
The answer to the poll (in my eyes) is yes to all. Can it be changed to please everyone? Perhaps...
"It's too easy!"
Moving forward, it won't be. High ranks will use adaptive logic. Means the harder you fight, the harder the AI fights. Should hopefully mean a good challenge for skilled players.
"It's just right."
Perhaps, but I want to take it down a notch and throw in more tactics to create a more enjoyable and less predictable experience.
"It's too hard!"
I hear ya... Adaptive logic could dynamically downgrade AI performance to give players a chance. E.g. player is fleeing... Pirate AI could downgrade its weapon accuracy and boosting ability, giving the player a good chance to escape.
Well, just some of my thoughts.
Personally I think the AI currently feels good. These changes will probably make it even better. However I think there are some other things that could be done to improve things:
- System Security Level matters now, players should be made aware when they are in dangerous systems. Dont get me wrong: Low Security / Anarchy systems should be dangerous. It seems they are now. But I suspect many players just continued to grind the same trade route they were using in 2.0 without being aware of that. IMHO thats an easy fix: Just a simple UI indicator or a ship warning message would be enough to make people aware that they are in a dangerous place.
- Make pirates behave more like pirates. Dont just make them mindlessly kill players. Make them shoot my ship down to 15% hull, then demand cargo again (add behaviour for situations where players dont have cargo, or dont drop enough). Add a chance that pirates just taunt fleeing players instead of chasing and killing them.
- Make High Security Systems even more safe. For example by making pirates more easily distracted by police forces. Make inexperienced pirates switch their focus from the player to the police ships more easily, so the player has a better chance to be saved by the police.
Just a few thoughts..
I have no idea why you have been insisting on making the game unenjoyable in a gazillion posts over the last 270 pages of this thread. I will again make the point that a game that does not offer fun to the vast majority of its players will not survive in the long run. 45% of the voters on this poll have a problem with the current state of the game. That is not the usual tempest in a teapot that we see after every major change.
I for one want Elite to survive and thrive. So I am all for a reasonable re-balance of the AI, even adjustable NPC difficulty (less threat, less reward - more threat, more reward), after the glaring bugs are removed (insta-kill railguns with 10 shots per second and such). Super tough Pecisk have fun playing the game, but so should Gramps Johnes, who does nothing more but a bit of space-trucking in his T-7 three hours a week!
I thought it would be interesting to think about why FDev made these changes. I think they are trying to solve several issues in the game.
So here is my wild speculation:
Complaint 1: One reason to play in solo / group is fear of superior combat Cmdrs PKing them
FDev Solution: Make NPCs much more dangerous so Cmdrs get better at fighting or running.
Notes: If the NPCs are more dangerous people will learn how to fight or escape better in solo and are less likely to be worried about playing in open.
Just to be clear, I don’t care what mode people play in. I chose the words carefully because I know it makes some people really upset (on both sides to this argument).
Complaint 2: Powerplay should be open only because of the increased risk in open.
FDev solution: Increase the risk in Powerplay everywhere by making the NPCs much more dangerous.
Notes: By making Powerplay dangerous in all modes, in theory, it reduces the disparity between the modes making it fairer.
Complaint 3: People combat log when about to lose a fight
FDev Solution: Get players more used to losing their ships by making the NPCs more dangerous.
Notes: Braben has stated that he was surprised that players were so attached to their ships that they would log to prevent its destruction. If paying the insurance (Rebuy be upon you) more often becomes a bigger part of the game maybe people will cheat a little less.
I am a big fan of the NPC changes; I know there are a lot that aren’t. I have seen the insurance screen on day 1 of 2.1 because I didn’t take the changes in to account but I don’t mind.
I have spent 146 million credits in 55 insurance claims so far (Rebuy be upon you), it is just a part of the game to me.
So here is my wild speculation:
Complaint 1: One reason to play in solo / group is fear of superior combat Cmdrs PKing them
FDev Solution: Make NPCs much more dangerous so Cmdrs get better at fighting or running.
Notes: If the NPCs are more dangerous people will learn how to fight or escape better in solo and are less likely to be worried about playing in open.
Just to be clear, I don’t care what mode people play in. I chose the words carefully because I know it makes some people really upset (on both sides to this argument).
Complaint 2: Powerplay should be open only because of the increased risk in open.
FDev solution: Increase the risk in Powerplay everywhere by making the NPCs much more dangerous.
Notes: By making Powerplay dangerous in all modes, in theory, it reduces the disparity between the modes making it fairer.
Complaint 3: People combat log when about to lose a fight
FDev Solution: Get players more used to losing their ships by making the NPCs more dangerous.
Notes: Braben has stated that he was surprised that players were so attached to their ships that they would log to prevent its destruction. If paying the insurance (Rebuy be upon you) more often becomes a bigger part of the game maybe people will cheat a little less.
I am a big fan of the NPC changes; I know there are a lot that aren’t. I have seen the insurance screen on day 1 of 2.1 because I didn’t take the changes in to account but I don’t mind.
I have spent 146 million credits in 55 insurance claims so far (Rebuy be upon you), it is just a part of the game to me.
Last edited:
Speak for yourself there captain. I'm primarily an explorer in the game, but still seem to be handling the NPCs just fine in my Vulture exploration ship.
Dropping off over 10 million credits worth of exploration data to one of the Engineers to get to 85% of the way through tier 4 to tier 5 was pretty sweet too.
He speaks for 45% of the voters on this poll. I would argue that he would speak for at least 45% of players.
This is the message that I have been trying to send in this thread the whole time. The "Git Gud" crowd will never understand that. Egocentrism, lack of empathy or lack of mental capacity, I have no idea. What I do know is that the same crowd will fail to understand why the game failed, if it should fail. Oh yes, if you make these points you get some stellar responses. More "git gud", "it is called Elite: Dangerous" or best of all "No" without any intelligible points.
Now lets wait for those
i have some counters. complaint one: solo players like me are now double deincentivised to try open. its not just the pker ganker commanders in open now its the npcs as well. solo is less fun for some because now we have npc griefers killing the players for no in game reason other than they are players.
cpmplaint 2: i no longer play so will not comment except to say from what i have read they get even more problems with allies standing by while rival factions swarm them for example.
complaint 3: from solo only perspective - i never combat logged to avoid damage. i had some close shaves when i miscalculated when to fight or run - both were anacondas - in 2.0 and one was down to 4% canopy but i killed it and repaired canopy and carried on. so coming from the perspective that while i like the better AI, the repair costs are much more and thus not making money, plus the possibly bugged/possibly intended auroPAC and machinerailguns, the net result of 'get players used to losing their ships' is... players like me dont even run the game any more let alone launch the ship. newbies have left because of constant high level npc interdictions meaning they couldnt earn money to upgrade modules let alone buy other ships. lots of us including me are waiting for more news on the instakill weapons before deciding to either wait for the patch (if bug) and then try the new AI again, or quit playing for good (if intended). and people have joined the forum purely in horror at some of the things which happened to them only to be faced with a suddenly toxic attitude from others... shouted down and insulted. i really hadnt expected that.
you had 146 million rebuys costs. its just a part of the game to you. thanks for being so honest and please dont take this for an insult.
you had more than 146 million to get back your ship multiple times. its a throwaway. i have 6 million and a half built ship i may need to sell for extra money instead of play the combat side and enjoy. my rebuy is 1,5 million. my ship isnt disposable to me. if there is a real solution to get players used to losing their ships to avoid combat logging, its remove any rebuy cost and perhaps also the loss of cargo. then people with 140 million less than you can spend on rebuys and still be happy can afford to leave the station and not worry about the grind from sidewinder happening again.
may your rebuys be rare commander.
Last edited:
Yup, standard attitude and reply of the "Git Gud" crowd.
Okay, after a few days and a refit to the Python (and death in the keelback cause keelback
) I think the game's AI is okay. There's a few bugs that need addressing and they really need to find a middle ground on AI deciding to run cause they sure as hell don't at moment. But with all that said, I think it's fine, could be harder cause I'm still a higher skill level than most of em but I get where it is now. I will say this though. FD, the AI with the engineered stuff... Wasn't that supposed to be rare? Not every last one of them? It's basically pushing me to a grind to get the engineered stuff sooner rather than when I want to do it. Doesn't feel like I have a choice but to upgrade my entire fleet today or get ready to high wake from every Sidey, Eagle and Viper that interdicts you if you're not in a ship but for a warzone. (Keelback, old Python build I was running.)
I get what you are going for and to some extent it's fine but do I really need to arm everything to the teeth with upgrades now? I'd like to like, have a ship to just jump around the bubble in without it being A grade everything.
AI, good, could be tougher but whatever. Just dial it back a little with their upgrades. only a little though, Don't nerf it to none existence like you guys tend to do. The dial's on 11. Pull it back to like 8?
God dang right. An AI that would be satisfactory to fight would have a 'fudge factor' equivalent to the human tendency to make errors and to have an actual reaction time.
Right now? It feels like the AI will switch 4 pips to sys instantaneously as soon as you fire. And as soon as you're reloading it's 4 pips to engines, or 4 to weps. As soon as it wants to boost, an instant of 4-pips eng. This AI is smart, okay - but it gains OP advantages from being a COMPUTER and being able to instantly, perfectly coordinate stuff a human being would have to be a spider to do, in addition to the OP mods they get instant access to.
Well, that is just plain wrong, because they did buy the game. It would be interesting to see how the percentage of refunds on Steam changed since the 2.1 release. I am afraid that Mortmal is pretty much bang on.
Nailed it thank you
Yeah, that was the fun part. Exploding my ship with the Purple Rain of Instant Annihilation (TM) I did not find very player-like though.
For those that enjoy that sort of thing, check out this Russian Roulette Simulation.
Last edited:
no i think we have established its not the combat AI thats the issue here its to do with the kinds of weapons and mods they can get that kill in seconds and the constant interdiction spam, that some seem to have or that you get in random sessions of play. the normal fights i had were tougher but more fun although i need to run a bit more often and its costing me more in repairs than bounties and trade cover now.
- Status